Minor or major alteration of a landmark;

Moving or demolition of a contributing resource;

Alteration or addition of 30% or more of floor area to a noncontributing resource;

Lot line adjustments and minor partitions that occur on a landmark or within a Historic District; and

Minor development on or to a landmark within a Historic District;

Major development on or to a historic resource,

Major development within a Historic District;

An application for a ministerial, minor, or major development shall be made on such forms and contain such information as the City Manager may require. If a railroad-highway crossing provides or will provide the only access to land that is the subject of the application, the applicant shall indicate that fact in the application.

All development in the R-0, R-2, R-3, R-W, CI and any PF or commercial zones and attached development in the R-5 zones will be developed under a unified site plan. The site plan will identify circulation patterns and access points, method of provision of public services and general placement of lots and structures, and general area and type of uses. Proposals with multiple ownerships shall include a written agreement of all owners that development of the site will occur pursuant to the site plan approved.

An application for a development permit shall be filed with the City Manager. The City Manager may charge an application fee to process a development permit application.

The City Manager may decline to accept an application that, on its face, has not completed any one or more of the procedural requirements:

A pre-application conference with the City Manager is required for:

A pre-application conference is not required for ministerial applications except for accessory dwelling units as required in subsection 1.e.i of this section, but may be scheduled at the request of the applicant or when required by the City Manager.

The purpose of the pre-application conference is to discuss the proposal, the applicable criteria and the requirements for completing an application. A copy of an adopted neighborhood plan shall also be provided to the applicant, regardless whether its provisions constitute criteria for the proposed development or not.

An applicant may request one or more additional pre-application conferences in order to discuss any changes in the applicable criteria and application requirements that may occur between the date of the pre-application conference and the filing of the development permit application.

The development permit application must be filed within one year from the date of the preapplication conference; if the development permit application is not filed within one year, a new pre-application conference is required unless the applicant requests and the City Manager approves a waiver of the additional pre-application conference.

The purpose of neighborhood contact is to identify potential issues or conflicts regarding a proposed application so that they may be addressed prior to filing. This contact is intended to result in a better application and to expedite and lessen the expense of the review process by avoiding needless delays, appeals, remands or denials. The City expects an applicant to take the reasonable concerns and recommendations of the neighborhood into consideration when preparing an application. The City expects the neighborhood association to work with the applicant to provide such input.

The City recognizes that potential impacts of development, such as stormwater runoff, traffic, noise or impacts on natural resources, may affect not only the area immediately surrounding the site of the proposed development, but the neighborhood in which the site is located, and adjacent neighborhoods.

In establishing the date, time and location of the meeting with the neighbors and with the neighborhoods:

The neighborhood associations, the applicant, and any interested person shall have the option of audiotaping the meeting. However, it is not a requirement that the meeting be audiotaped.

The applicant shall provide details in the neighborhood meeting that convey the appearance (materials and colors), site design, density, natural resources protection areas, arrangement of uses, access and other relevant visual information that would be included in a complete application for the type of development proposed.

An application shall not be accepted for filing unless and until the applicant demonstrates compliance with this section by including with the application:

The purpose of this subsection and subsections 1.g.ii and iii of this section is to codify the statutory maximum review period in the applicable ORS 197.311 (Final Action on Application for Certain Residential Developments Required Within 100 Days) or 227.178 (Final Action on Certain Applications Required Within 120 Days) (referred to herein as the "Maximum Review Period Rule"). In the event of a difference in procedure for determining when an application is complete, the provisions of then ORS 197.311 or 227.178 shall supersede any inconsistent provisions of this subsection and subsections 1.g.ii and iii of this section. This subsection and subsections 1.g.ii and iii of this section are applicable only to those minor and major development applications that are subject to the requirements of the Maximum Review Period Rules under state law.

The City Manager shall review the application and determine whether it is complete. The City Manager shall mail a written notice of such determination within 30 days of the date of filing of the application. If the City Manager determines that the application is incomplete, the City Manager shall inform the applicant in the written notice of the additional information necessary to make the application complete. The application shall be complete at such time as:

When the City Manager determines the application is complete, the City Manager shall inform the applicant of the completeness by mail. A copy of the completeness letter shall also be mailed to the affected neighborhood associations identified in LOC § 50.07.003.1.f.iii(1)(a) and (b). Within ten days of the mailing of the notice of completeness to the respective neighborhood associations, the chair, or the chair’s representative, of any of the noticed neighborhood associations may request a meeting with the City Manager to discuss the application. The purpose of this meeting is to identify issues. No evidence or argument presented at this meeting shall be deemed to be made part of the record; any evidence or argument shall be submitted in the manner required by LOC § 50.07.003.3, Public Notice/ Opportunity for Public Comment, or LOC § 50.07.003.15.b.i, and LOC § 50.07.003.4.a, Conduct of the Hearing. If a meeting is requested, the applicant shall be notified of the meeting and invited to attend the meeting.

A final decision on an application, including resolution of all appeals, shall be rendered within the applicable Maximum Review Period Rules after the application is deemed complete pursuant to ORS 197.311 or 227.178.

Nothing in this section shall be deemed to be a limitation on the City’s ability to render a final decision on a land use application after the expiration of the applicable Maximum Review Period Rule.

No extension or continuance is available to file a completed application, per ORS 227.178(3, 4).

The applicant for a major or minor development may request in writing a specified period of time for a continuance of review of a complete application. A request for an extension or continuance shall be deemed a waiver of the applicable Maximum Review Period Rule deadline contained in ORS 227.178 for the period of the extension or continuance, and for any additional time required for rescheduling or renoticing review proceedings. The total of all extensions for review of a complete application may not exceed 245 days.

Modifications of a pending application shall be considered under the standards in effect at the time the application was filed, if the modification:

Any modification that does not comply with subsection 1.j.i of this section shall be considered a new application.

The City Manager shall provide written notice to property owners within 300 ft. of the entire contiguous site for which the application is made. Except for residential infill design review (RID) applications, if there are fewer than 50 properties (excluding City-owned properties) within 300 ft. of the site, the notice area shall be expanded by ten-ft. increments outward from the 300-ft. boundary until at least 50 properties (excluding City-owned properties) are included in the notice area. The list shall be compiled from the most recent property tax assessment roll.

Written notice shall also be sent to:

Written notice shall be provided to:

In addition to the notification required above, the City shall notify the Oregon State Department of Transportation by first class mail (or electronic mail if consented to) immediately upon receipt of a complete application for development, change or intensification of use in the Greenway Compatibility Review Boundary area and shall notify the Department of final actions taken on the applications.

The notice required by this section, above, shall:

Within three business days after the mailing date of the notices in LOC § 50.07.003.3.a.i through iv, the City shall post notice on the property subject to the proposed application. The notice shall be posted at a location visible from the public right-of-way. The notice shall state:

Notice of a public hearing before a hearing body containing the information required below shall be mailed at least 20 days before the initial public hearing as follows:

Nothing in subsection 3.c.i of this section shall preclude the City Manager from providing additional public notice as the City Manager deems appropriate.

Except as otherwise provided in subsection 3.c.iv of this section, the notice shall:

In addition to the mailed notice above, notice shall be given by posting upon the subject property in the same manner as required by LOC § 50.07.003.3.a.vi.

The time, date, and place of the public hearing;

A brief description of the proposed legislative amendment; and

A phone number for obtaining additional information.

The Chair shall open the hearing by stating the general nature of the application, followed by a summary of these procedures.

The Chair shall ask whether any member of the hearing body has any potential bias, conflict of interest, or had ex parte contact. "Ex parte contact" is any contact regarding the subject application outside of the public hearing, including a site visit. Ex parte contact does not include contact with City staff members. Any member of the hearing body who has bias, a conflict of interest, or has had an ex parte contact shall explain the nature of such bias, conflict or ex parte contact.

The Chair shall next ask if there is any challenge to a hearing body member’s right to consider the application. Unless the challenge is based upon information revealed pursuant to subsection 4.a.xi(2) of this section, a challenging party must deliver a written document setting forth the reasons and authority for such challenge to the member challenged and the hearing body Chair at least 24 hours prior to the hearing.

The Chair shall next call for presentation of the staff report. Staff shall list the applicable substantive criteria and shall explain the reasons behind the City Manager’s recommendation or decision, in the case of an appeal.

The Chair shall state that evidence and testimony must be directed to the applicable criteria described by staff or to other criteria in the Comprehensive Plan or land use regulations which the person believes to apply to the decision. The Chair shall also state that failure to raise an issue accompanied by statements or evidence sufficient to afford the decision-maker and the parties an opportunity to respond precludes appeal to the City Council or LUBA on that issue.

The Chair shall call for the applicant’s testimony.

The Chair shall call for other evidence or testimony in support of the application.

The Chair shall call for evidence or testimony in opposition to the application.

The Chair shall call for neutral evidence or testimony.

The Chair shall call for rebuttal by the applicant. The applicant’s rebuttal is limited to responding to testimony previously submitted and shall be based solely on the evidence in the record. If the applicant submits new evidence in aid of rebuttal, the Chair shall allow any person to respond to that evidence, and provide for final rebuttal by the applicant.

Prior to the conclusion of the initial evidentiary hearing, any participant may request an opportunity to present additional evidence or testimony regarding the application. The hearing body shall grant such request by continuing the hearing pursuant to subsection 4.a.xi(1) of this section or leaving the record open for additional written evidence or testimony pursuant to subsection 4.a.xi(2) of this section.

Unless waived by the applicant, the hearing body shall allow the applicant at least seven days after the record is closed to all other parties to submit final written arguments in support of the application. The applicant’s final submittal shall be considered part of the record, but shall not include any new evidence.

If no continuance is granted and the record is not left open, or at the conclusion of such continuance or open record period and/or any additional seven-day rebuttal period granted to the applicant pursuant to subsection 4.a.xii of this section, the Chair shall return the matter to the table for deliberation and decision. The hearing body’s deliberations may include questions to or testimony by City staff regarding the criteria, evidence and testimony in the record. The hearing body may also direct questions to any person present. If any person other than City staff is questioned or allowed to make comments during deliberation, the Chair shall allow any other person to respond to such comments.

For purposes of this section:

The purpose of time limits on testimony is to provide all interested persons with an adequate opportunity to present and respond to testimony while at the same time ensuring that the hearing can be conducted in an efficient and expeditious manner. The following time limits on testimony shall be observed during a hearing conducted by a hearing body, subject to the right of the Chair, with hearing body consent, to amend or waive the time limits:

The time limits set forth in this section shall not include time taken up resolving objections or by questions or response to questions from the hearing body.

As a general guideline, if the Chair decides to increase or decrease the time limits for testimony, the Chair shall do so in equal proportion for both the appellant and the applicant. The Chair may increase the time limit for rebuttal without increasing other time limits on testimony, however, in cases where the testimony in opposition is so complex or extensive that five minutes would not give the applicant an adequate opportunity to respond to the testimony.

Any person in attendance at the hearing may cede their time for testimony to a representative or another person and thereby increase that representative’s or other person’s time for testimony. No person’s or other representative’s testimony may be increased to greater than ten minutes. No person may cede their time to the applicant or the appellant.

Any person may present testimony at a public hearing before a hearing body on a major development application or appeal of a minor development decision.

Any person may submit exhibits or written comments prior to the public hearing. Written comments or exhibits submitted prior to the public hearing must be received by the City Manager by noon on the day of the scheduled hearing to be submitted by staff at the hearing. Exhibits or written comments that are merely referred to in testimony but which are not placed before the hearing body pursuant to this section shall not become part of the record of the proceedings.

The hearing body may take official notice of all adjudicative facts and law which may be judicially noticed pursuant to ORS 40.060 to 40.090, including an ordinance, comprehensive plan, resolution, order, written policy or other enactment of the City of Lake Oswego. Matters officially noticed need not be established by evidence and may be considered by the hearing body in determination of the matter.

The hearing body shall continue a public hearing or leave the record open when required to do so, pursuant to LOC § 50.07.003.4.a.xi.

The hearing body may elect to continue a hearing one or more times on its own motion or at the reasonable request of a party. Any continuance or extension of the record requested by an applicant shall result in a corresponding extension of the time limitations of the applicable Maximum Review Period. If the initial evidentiary hearing has not been completed pursuant to LOC § 50.07.003.4.a, the continued hearing shall resume at the point in the proceedings at which the hearing was continued. If the initial evidentiary hearing has been concluded and the hearing body desires a continuance to reopen the record for additional testimony, the continued hearing shall be conducted as provided in subsection 4.f.iii of this section. In the latter case, the hearing body may limit evidence or testimony to a particular issue or issues, but any person shall be allowed to raise new issues which relate to the new evidence, testimony or criteria for decision-making for which the hearing body continued the hearing.

Except as otherwise provided in subsection 4.f.ii of this section, a continued hearing shall be conducted as follows:

No additional notice of a continued hearing is required if the hearing body continues the hearing to a date, time and location or telephonic/electronic means of attendance certain. If a public hearing must be continued due to lack of a quorum of the hearing body, no additional notice of the continued hearing is required if all entrances to the hearing location are posted by the time and date of the originally scheduled hearing with a conspicuous written notice setting forth a date, time and place certain for the continued hearing, or if the hearing was to be held by telephonic or electronic means, the continuance is so announced at that time in the designated telephonic or electronic manner. In all other cases, public notice of a continued hearing shall be given pursuant to LOC § 50.07.003.3.c.

At the conclusion of deliberations, the hearing body shall make a preliminary oral decision to approve, approve with conditions pursuant to LOC § 50.07.003.5, or deny an application based upon the applicable standards and criteria and the evidence and testimony in the record. The preliminary oral decision is not a final decision. At any time prior to the adoption of the final order pursuant to subsection 4.g.ii of this section, the hearing body may modify or change its decision or choose to reopen the hearing.

The hearing body shall adopt a final written order either immediately after making its preliminary oral decision or at a public meeting within a reasonable time after making the preliminary oral decision. The final written order shall consist of a brief statement that explains the criteria and standards considered relevant, states the facts relied upon in rendering the decision and explains the justification for the decision based upon the criteria, standards and facts set forth. The order shall also contain or incorporate by reference any conditions of approval deemed necessary or appropriate by the hearing body. A proposed order may be prepared by the City Manager or may be prepared by the prevailing party subject to review and approval of the City Manager. The hearing body shall amend the proposed order if it finds that the proposed order does not accurately articulate the hearing body’s decision. Except as provided in subsection 4.g.iii of this section, the written order is the final decision on the application and the date of the order for purposes of appeal is the date on which it is adopted by the hearing body.

In the case of a major development which requires an amendment of the Comprehensive Plan, or the text or map of this Code, the hearing body’s order adopted pursuant to subsection 4.g.ii of this section shall be considered a recommendation to Council and not a final decision. The notice of the hearing body’s decision provided pursuant to LOC § 50.07.003.4.h shall be modified to note that the decision is a recommendation which will be forwarded to the Council for public hearing and final decision. The Council shall review the recommendation pursuant to LOC § 50.07.003.7.f through o, Appeals, and LOC § 50.07.003.4.e, Preservation of Order, except that, for purposes of the appeal hearing in LOC § 50.07.003.7.i, Conduct of the Appeal Hearing, the applicant shall proceed with testimony, followed by persons in favor of the application, opponents, and rebuttal by the applicant.

Motions for reconsideration of either a preliminary decision or final order filed by a party shall not be allowed. The City Manager may recommend reconsideration prior to adoption of the final order if the City Manager, in consultation with the City Attorney, believes reconsideration is necessary to correct a procedural error that prejudiced a party’s substantial rights.

Include the file number, date and brief summary of the final decision;

Include the name and address of the applicant;

Include an easily understood geographical reference to the subject property and a map, if applicable;

State that a copy of the decision is available for review, and that a copy can be obtained at cost; and

State that the decision may be appealed by filing a written notice of intent to appeal with the City Manager within 15 calendar days of the date of the final decision. The notice shall include the requirements for filing a notice of intent to appeal contained in LOC § 50.07.003.7.d. The name, address and phone number of the City Manager shall be included in the notice.

The condition is necessary to bring the application into compliance with applicable approval criteria.

The condition is required as a condition of approval, construction or implementation by the development standards, the Lake Oswego Code or state statute.

The condition is reasonably related to alleviation of a need for public services or facilities created or contributed to by the proposed development. As used in this section, "public services or facilities" includes sewer, water, surface water management, parks, open space, streets, sidewalks, and pathways.

The condition is reasonably related to eliminating or mitigating a negative impact on natural features or processes or on the built environment of the neighborhood which is created or contributed to by the proposed development. As used in this section, "natural features or processes" includes tree groves, stream corridors and natural drainage ways, significant tree(s), wetlands, and other natural areas.

The proposed variance or exception to a code requirement is based on the preservation of tree(s), and the condition of approval is reasonably related to preserving the tree(s) that is the basis for the variance or exception.

Imposition of a development schedule.

Requiring reservation or protection of land for open space or to protect significant natural features.

Requiring dedication of property, rights-of-way, easements or conservation easements for public facilities such as streets, utilities, pathways, sidewalks, surface water management and street trees, or for protection of tree groves, wetlands, stream corridors or other natural features. Dedications of property or property rights pursuant to this subsection must be based upon findings pursuant to LOC § 50.07.003.5.a.iii or iv.

Requiring on-site and off-site construction of or improvements to public facilities where necessary to ensure adequate capacity and where service demand will be created or increased by the proposed development. The costs of off-site improvements may be prorated between the applicant and the City in proportion to the increased service demand which will be created by the project when compared to the demand existing if the project were not constructed.

Requiring construction and maintenance guarantees to ensure that required public facilities are constructed to and will comply with City standards, regulations or conditions.

Requiring modifications in the design or intensity of a proposed development or to require or prohibit certain construction methods.

Requiring approval, inspection, or evaluation by another agency, jurisdiction, public utility or consultant.

Limiting the number, location or design of street accesses to a proposed development to maintain street capacity, improve safety, or otherwise comply with an approval criterion.

Requiring covenants, conditions or restrictions to be recorded against the property.

Except as provided by subsection 6.a.ii of this section, a final decision approving a development permit becomes effective upon expiration of the local appeal period, unless an ordinance amendment is required in order to implement the approval. In the latter case, the approval becomes effective at the time the ordinance becomes effective pursuant to the Lake Oswego Charter. The filing of an appeal automatically stays the decision until resolution of the appeal by City appellate authorities.

A final decision of the City Council approving a development permit is effective immediately and is not stayed by appeal to Land Use Board of Appeals (LUBA), unless LUBA so orders pursuant to ORS 197.845.

A final decision denying a development permit is effective immediately.

If an application is denied and is not appealed, or the denial is affirmed on appeal, no new application for the same or a substantially similar proposal shall be filed within six months after the date of final denial. A new application shall not be considered "the same or substantially similar" if it can be modified, and is modified, to address the reasons why the original application was denied.

A final decision of the City Manager on a minor development application may be appealed to a hearing body by the applicant or any person aggrieved by the decision. An appeal shall be made by filing a written request for a hearing with the City Manager within 15 calendar days of the date of decision.

Exception: Minor development decision specified by this Code to be made by the City Engineer.

For decisions made by the City Manager on historic resources, the applicant or any person aggrieved by the decision may appeal that decision. (If notice of the application was given, the person must have participated in the process leading to the Manager’s decision in order to appeal.) The City Manager shall determine if the Development Review Commission or Historic Resources Advisory Board is the appropriate hearing body based upon the nature of the decision appealed, the notice of appeal, and the expertise of the Commission and Board.

For decisions made by the City Manager on a similar use analysis, the Planning Commission is the hearing body for an appeal.

A written request for a hearing shall contain:

The City Manager shall reject the appeal if it is not filed within the 15-day appeal period set forth in subsection 7.b.i of this section, is not filed in the form required by subsection 7.b.ii of this section, or does not include the filing fee required by subsection 7.b.ii of this section. If the City Manager rejects an appeal, the City Manager shall so notify the appellant by letter. This letter shall include a brief explanation of the reason why the City Manager rejects the appeal. A decision of the City Manager to reject an appeal pursuant to this section is final and is not subject to appeal to the hearing body or the City Council. An appeal rejected pursuant to subsection 7.b.ii of this section may be corrected if it is refiled within the 15-day appeal period set forth in subsection 7.b.i of this section.

An appeal of a City Manager decision regarding a minor development shall be heard de novo by the hearing body pursuant to LOC §§ 50.07.003.3.c, 50.07.003.4 and 50.07.003.15.b.i and ii.

Exception: Minor development decision specified by this Code to be made by the City Engineer.

A final decision of a hearing body or City Engineer may be appealed to the Lake Oswego City Council by the applicant, any person who appeared before the hearing body either orally or in writing regarding the application, or any person that submitted written comment to the City Engineer on the City Engineer’s decision. An appeal shall be made by filing a notice of intent to appeal with the City Manager within 15 calendar days of the date of the hearing body’s final decision.

A notice of intent to appeal shall be in writing and shall contain:

The appeal fee shall be set by resolution of the City Council. The appeal fee shall be reasonable and shall be no more than the average cost of such appeals or the actual cost of the appeal.

The City Manager shall reject the appeal if it is not filed within the 15-day appeal period set forth in subsection 7.c.i of this section, is not filed in the form required by subsection 7.c.ii of this section, or does not include the filing fee required by subsections 7.c.ii and iii of this section. If the City Manager rejects an appeal, the City Manager shall so notify the appellant by letter. This letter shall include a brief explanation of the reason why the City Manager rejects the appeal. A decision of the City Manager to reject an appeal pursuant to this section is a final City decision as of the date of the letter and is not subject to appeal to a hearing body or the City Council. The appellant shall be allowed to correct a failure to comply with subsection 7.c.ii or iii of this section, if the correction can be made and is made within the 15-day appeal period provided in subsection 7.c.i of this section.

If more than one person files a Notice of Intent to Appeal a specific hearing body decision, the appeals shall be consolidated into one proceeding. The appeal fee shall be divided equally among the multiple appellants; any amount deposited in excess of the amount determined by the City Recorder to be owed shall be refunded on a pro rata basis.

The appellants shall share the appellant’s time for testimony equally or may make such other split as they mutually agree, or the appellants may elect to have one person represent all appellants. If appeals are filed by opposing parties (i.e., an applicant for a project and a person opposed to the project), they may be consolidated into one proceeding but shall be heard separately prior to the decision. The Mayor, with Council consent, may decide to alter the time limits for testimony depending on the circumstances.

Following receipt of a Notice of Intent to Appeal filed in compliance with subsection 7.b of this section, the City Manager shall prepare a record for Council review containing:

The City Manager shall prepare a staff report on the appeal explaining the basis for the decision as relates to the reasons for appeal set forth in the Notice of Intent to Appeal, and such other matters related to the appeal as deemed appropriate. The staff report shall be available for public inspection at least ten days prior to the appeal hearing.

A verbatim transcript of the hearing body proceedings is not required. Any person who appeared before the hearing body on the application may prepare a certified verbatim transcript of all or part of the hearing body proceedings at that person’s own expense. The City Manager may prepare a certified verbatim transcript of all or part of the hearing body proceedings at the City’s expense if the City Manager deems a transcript necessary or advisable. A certified transcript prepared pursuant to this subsection shall be considered to be part of the record of the hearing body proceedings, and, if offered, shall be accepted into evidence and considered by the City Council.

Written notice of the appeal hearing before the City Council shall be sent by electronic mail to the email address provided, or if no email address is provided then by regular mail, no later than 14 days prior to the date of the hearing to the appellant, the applicant if different from the appellant, and all persons who testified either orally or in writing before the hearing body, or, for a minor development decision of the City Engineer, submitted written testimony to the City Engineer.

Notice of the hearing shall:

Except as provided in subsections 7.h.ii and iii of this section, Council review is limited to the evidence in the record. No new evidence may be presented at the hearing and no person may testify unless that person appeared either orally or in writing before the hearing body or City Engineer, as applicable. No issue may be raised on appeal to the Council that was not raised with sufficient specificity to enable the hearing body and the parties or, if applicable, the City Engineer, to respond.

The City Council may take official notice of all adjudicative facts and law which may be judicially noticed pursuant to ORS 40.060 to 40.090, including an ordinance, comprehensive plan, resolution, order, written policy or other enactment of the City of Lake Oswego. Matters officially noticed need not be contained within the record and may be considered by the hearing body in determination of the matter.

The Council may reopen the record and consider new evidence if such a request is made prior to or at the Council hearing by the appellant or any person who testified before the hearing body or, if applicable, the City Engineer, and the requesting party demonstrates:

If the appellant is the applicant:

If the appellant is not the applicant:

Any person who testified either orally or in writing before the hearing body (or for an appeal of a decision of the City Engineer, any person who testified in writing before the City Engineer) may testify either orally or in writing before the Council on appeal. Such testimony shall be limited to argument regarding issues raised before the hearing body (or City Engineer), and shall be based solely upon the record of the proceedings. Enlargements, illustrations, maps or other exhibits may be submitted as long as they are part of the record or are entirely derived from evidence in the record.

Written testimony may be submitted prior to the public hearing and must be received by the City Recorder by 12:00 p.m. two business days prior to the scheduled hearing. Written comments that are merely referred to in testimony but which are not placed before the hearing body pursuant to this section shall not become part of the record of the proceedings. Written comments that attempt to present new evidence or raise new issues not presented or raised before the hearing body shall be rejected.

The Council may elect to continue a hearing one or more times on its own motion or at the reasonable request of a party. No continuance shall be granted at the request of the applicant unless the applicant waives the applicable Maximum Review Period in writing or on the record. If the hearing has not been completed pursuant to LOC § 50.07.003.7.j, the continued hearing shall resume at the point in the proceedings at which the hearing was continued. If the hearing has been concluded and the Council desires a continuance to reopen the hearing for additional testimony, the continued hearing shall be conducted as provided in subsection 7.m.ii of this section. In the latter case, the Council may limit testimony to a particular issue or issues. If the appeal hearing has been concluded and the Mayor has returned the matter to the table for deliberations, the Council may continue deliberations to a date, time and place certain.

If an appeal hearing is continued to reopen the record for additional testimony, it shall be conducted as follows:

No additional notice of a continued hearing is required if the Council continues a hearing to a date, time and place certain. If a public hearing must be continued due to lack of a quorum of the Council, no additional notice of the continued hearing is required if all entrances to the hearing location are posted by the time and date of the originally scheduled hearing with a conspicuous written notice setting forth a date, time and place certain for the continued hearing. In all other cases, public notice of a continued hearing shall be given pursuant to LOC § 50.07.003.7.h.

At the conclusion of deliberations, the Council shall make a preliminary oral decision. The Council may affirm, reverse or modify the hearing body’s decision in whole or in part, or may remand the decision back to the hearing body for additional evidence or consideration. The preliminary oral decision is not a final decision. At any time prior to the adoption of the final order pursuant to subsection 7.n.ii of this section the Council may modify its decision based upon the record or choose to reopen the hearing.

The Council shall adopt a final written order either immediately after making its preliminary oral decision or at a public meeting within a reasonable time after making the preliminary oral decision. The final written order shall consist of a brief statement that explains the criteria and standards considered relevant, states the facts relied upon in rendering the decision and explains the justification for the decision based upon the criteria, standards and facts set forth. The order shall also contain or incorporate by reference any conditions of approval deemed necessary or appropriate by the Council. A proposed order may be prepared by the City Attorney or may be prepared by the prevailing party subject to review and approval of the City Attorney. The Council shall amend the proposed order if it finds that the proposed order does not accurately articulate the Council’s decision. The written order is the final decision on the application and the date of the order for purposes of appeal is the date on which it adopted by the Council.

Motions for reconsideration of either a preliminary decision or final order filed by a party shall not be allowed. The City Manager may recommend reconsideration prior to adoption of the final order if the City Manager, in consultation with the City Attorney, believes reconsideration is necessary to correct a procedural error that prejudiced a party’s substantial rights.

Include the file number, date and brief summary of the final decision;

Include the name and address of the applicant;

Include an easily understood geographical reference to the subject property and a map, if applicable;

State that the decision is available for review, and that a copy can be obtained at cost; and

State that the decision may be appealed by filing a written notice of intent to appeal with the Oregon State Land Use Board of Appeals (LUBA) within 21 days of the date of the final decision. The address and telephone number of the Land Use Board of Appeals shall be included in the notice.

An order of the City Council remanding an application to a hearing body is a final decision for purposes of appeal to LUBA. If not appealed, all issues resolved by the remand order shall be considered decided and may not be revisited on remand, unless addressing the remanded issues results in amendments to the application which change the criteria or the factual basis on which the Council based its decision regarding an issue or issues not remanded.

The hearing body shall issue public notice and hear the application on remand as provided in LOC § 50.07.003.15.b.i and ii and LOC § 50.07.003.3.c, except that issues shall be limited as provided in subsection 8.a.i of this section.

Hold a hearing on remand if the issue upon which LUBA remanded the decision can be resolved by the City Council without reopening the record for additional evidence. Notice of the hearing on remand shall be given pursuant to LOC § 50.07.003.7.g, Notice of the Appeal Hearing, to all persons who testified before the City Council at the public hearing or hearings that led to the decision remanded by LUBA. Instead of the explanation contained in LOC § 50.07.003.7.g.ii(4), the notice shall set forth issues on remand that will be considered by the Council. The hearing shall be conducted pursuant to LOC § 50.07.003.4, Hearings, except that testimony shall be limited to the issues upon which LUBA remanded the decision to the City, unless the application is amended on remand in a manner which changes the applicable criteria or the factual basis on which LUBA or the City Council based its decision regarding an issue or issues not remanded.

Remand the application to the hearing body if the issue upon which LUBA remanded the decision requires reopening the record for additional evidence. Notice of the hearing on remand shall be given pursuant to LOC § 50.07.003.3.c, Notice for Public Hearing, and the hearing shall be conducted pursuant to LOC § 50.07.003.4, Hearings, except that the notice of the applicable criteria and the testimony shall be limited to the criterion or criteria or the issue or issues upon which LUBA remanded the decision to the City, unless the application is modified in a manner which changes the applicable criteria or the factual basis on which LUBA or the City Council based its decision regarding an issue or issues not remanded. A decision of the hearing body on remand may be appealed to the City Council pursuant to LOC § 50.07.003.7.c, Filing an Appeal of a Hearing Body Decision.

When an applicant for a development permit has an obligation to construct or improve public facilities imposed by a standard or criteria or as a condition of the permit, the obligation shall be fulfilled prior to the issuance of a permit for building construction on the site unless the City Manager has granted a waiver in writing of this requirement and the applicant has filed with the City Manager an acknowledgment of the obligation. The acknowledgment shall state the nature of the obligation, the time within which the obligation is to be met, identify the property subject to the obligation and contain a security deposit in a form acceptable to the City Manager and in an amount equal to 120% of the cost of fulfilling the obligation as estimated by the City Manager for the year in which fulfillment of the obligation is anticipated. A sufficient performance bond, cash deposit, or letter of credit are acceptable forms of security. Return of the security deposit shall be conditioned upon the applicant carrying out the obligation.

As an additional and separate part of the acknowledgment, the applicant shall agree to maintain the public facility for a period of one year following acceptance by the City Manager, to include but not be limited to repair, replacement and all things necessary to ensure the operational integrity of the facility, and shall provide the City with security in the amount of 10% of the cost of the improvement to insure the fulfillment of this obligation.

The security shall be forfeited to the City if the applicant does not fulfill the requirements stated in the acknowledgment. The City may use the security to complete the obligation or any part of it. Until the obligation is completed the security shall remain in the custody of the City or shall be placed in an escrow account subject to City control.

Upon receipt of written notice to the City Manager that the public facility has been completed and is ready for final inspection and acceptance, the City Manager shall within ten calendar days make such inspection. If the City Manager finds the work to be acceptable, there shall promptly be issued a final certificate stating that the work has been completed and is accepted.

Landscaping or landscape alterations, unless:

Normal or emergency repair or maintenance of public or private buildings, structures, or utilities.

Construction of a structure that does not require a building permit unless in flood management area.

Interior remodeling which does not change a structure’s occupancy classification or change the structure to a use that does not qualify as a permitted use in the zone, unless in flood management area.

Exterior remodeling of a structure that does not require a building permit, (1) and the structure is not identified as a landmark on the City Landmark Designation List and is not a contributing resource in a Historic District; or (2) unless in the flood management area.

Exterior remodeling of a National Register property that (1) is not a "demolition" as defined in OAR 660-023-0200(1), and (2) does not require a building permit.

Street vacations.

Temporary structures and uses listed in LOC § 50.03.005 or which are for relief of victims of disaster or in an emergency.

Where an awning is the only change to the facade of an existing building, and the awning is funded or partially funded utilizing a financial incentive grant, provided by or obtained through the authority of the City of Lake Oswego or LORA. "Financial incentive" includes a grant, fee waiver, revolving loan, tax abatement, property exchange, or similar financial incentive provided by or secured through the City or LORA.

Where an awning or canopy covering an outdoor seating area of a restaurant is the only change to the facade of a building, and the canopy/awning is constructed during October 21, 2020 through May 31, 2021 (COVID-19 exemption window). In such instance, it shall cover no more than 30 percent of the width of any street-facing facade and shall be set back no less than 20 feet from any residential zone. Any lighting under the awning/canopy shall be directed downward and shielded or screened to prevent lighting off-premises areas.

No development permit pursuant to this Code is required for exempt development.

A ministerial development is a development which requires a permit or review from the City where the decision:

Ministerial development applications shall be reviewed and approved by the City Manager.

A ministerial development shall comply with the requirements of the zone, including overlay zones, in which the subject lot or parcel is located, the Stormwater Management Code (LOC Article 38.25) and, other than development that is classified as ministerial development per subsection 13.a.ii.(20) of this section, shall comply with the following sections of the development standards:

A minor development is a development which requires a permit from the City that:

"Minor development" under subsection 14.a.i(1) of this section includes:

Notice shall be provided pursuant to LOC § 50.07.003.3, Public Notice/Opportunity for Public Comment.

Except for applications for a minor development in the R-DD zone, downtown redevelopment, LGVCO, and FMU district design variances (LOC §§ 50.08.003.2.a through 50.08.003.2.d), major variances, and appeals of a decision of the City Manager regarding a minor development application, minor development permit applications shall be reviewed and decided by the City Manager. In the alternative, the City Manager may refer a minor development application directly to a hearing body for public hearing and decision pursuant to LOC § 50.07.003.4, Hearings.

Minor development in the R-DD zone, design variances in the downtown redevelopment, LGVCO, and FMU districts, and major variances shall be reviewed by the Development Review Commission pursuant to LOC § 50.07.003.4, Hearings.

Designation and removal of designation of landmarks and historic districts; demolition, moving, alteration of a landmark; and demolition and relocation of National Register properties shall be reviewed as provided in LOC § 50.01.003.2 and .3.

A minor development shall comply with:

A major development is a development which requires a permit from the City involving the greatest level of review.

"Major development" includes:

A major development is subject to public notice, hearing and opportunity for appeal as described in this section.

All documents or evidence relied on by the applicant for a development shall be submitted to the City and be available for inspection by the public at no cost.

The City Manager shall prepare a staff report on the application. The staff report shall contain an analysis of the applicable criteria and the evidence in the record. Based upon this review, the City Manager shall recommend approval, approval with conditions, denial, or continuance of the application. The staff report shall be completed and shall be available for public inspection at no cost at least ten days prior to the date of the public hearing.

Major developments are reviewed by a hearing body.

A "legislative decision" is an amendment to the policies, procedures, standards, criteria or map designations of the Comprehensive Plan, and this Community Development Code, unless such amendment applies to a small number of identified properties only or is required to effect a particular development permit application.

An amendment to the policies, procedures, standards, criteria or map designations of the Comprehensive Plan or this Community Development Code which is not a "legislative decision" as defined in subsection 16.a.i of this section shall be considered "quasi-judicial" and shall be processed as a major development.

Comply with any applicable state law;

Comply with any applicable statewide planning goal or administrative rule adopted pursuant to ORS Chapter 197; and

In the case of a legislative amendment to this Community Development Code, comply with any applicable provision of the Lake Oswego Comprehensive Plan.

Except as provided by subsections 16.c.ii and iii of this section, any proposed amendment or addition to the City’s acknowledged Comprehensive Plan or land use regulations shall be forwarded to the Director of the Oregon Department of Land Conservation and Development (DLCD) as required by OAR 660-018-0020 before the first evidentiary hearing on adoption. The City shall include the text of the proposed amendment and any supplemental information that the City believes is necessary to inform the Director as to the effect of the proposal. The notice shall include the date set for the first evidentiary hearing.

Advance notice to the Director of DLCD is not required when the City determines that the statewide planning goals do not apply to the proposed amendment or new regulation.

The City may submit the proposed amendment or new regulation with less than the required notice by OAR 660-018-0020 where the City determines an emergency exists requiring expedited review.

Not later than 20 days following a final decision pursuant to subsections 16.c.i through iii of this section, the City shall provide a copy of the adopted text and the findings to the Director of DLCD. If the text of the amendment as adopted differs substantially from that sent to the Director of DLCD pursuant to subsection 16.c.i of this section, the City Manager shall note the changes that have been made in the notice to the Director of DLCD. If the text and findings are mailed, they shall include a signed statement by the person mailing them indicating the date of deposit in the mail.

Except in cases where a legislative amendment is mandated by state statute, a legislative decision shall be referred to the Planning Commission for review and recommendation. In cases where a legislative amendment is mandated by state statute, referral to the Planning Commission for review and recommendation is not required. If an amendment is not referred to the Planning Commission for review and recommendation, a copy of the proposed amendment shall be sent to the Planning Commission, along with notice of the City Council’s hearing on the proposed amendment. In cases where part of a proposed amendment is mandated by state statute but part is not, the legislative decision shall be referred to the Planning Commission for review and recommendation pursuant to this section.

The Planning Commission shall hold at least one public hearing on the proposed legislative decision.

Notice of a Planning Commission hearing on a legislative decision shall be published pursuant to LOC § 50.07.003.3.d, Notice for Legislative Hearing.

The Chair of the Planning Commission shall follow the following procedures when conducting a legislative decision hearing:

The following time limits on testimony shall be observed, subject to the right of the Chair, with Planning Commission consent, to modify or waive the time limits: five minutes each for individuals and ten minutes each for recognized neighborhood associations, homeowners associations, government or governmental agency or other incorporated public interest organizations. The time limits shall not include time taken up by questions and response from the Planning Commission. Any person in attendance may cede their time for testimony to another person, but in no case shall any person’s testimony be increased to greater than ten minutes.

Notice of a City Council hearing on a legislative decision shall be published pursuant to LOC § 50.07.003.3.d, Notice for Legislative Hearing. Notice shall also be mailed at least ten days in advance to the Committee for Citizen Involvement, to all recognized Neighborhood Associations and to all persons who appeared either orally or in writing at the Planning Commission hearing. The notice shall include:

The Mayor shall follow the same procedures identified for the Planning Commission hearing in LOC § 50.07.003.16.d.iv, Conduct of the Hearing, when conducting a legislative decision hearing.

The following time limits on testimony identified for the Planning Commission in LOC § 50.07.003.4.b shall be observed in the City Council hearing.

A legislative decision becomes effective on the thirtieth day from the date of enactment of the ordinance, or immediately if adopted by emergency, pursuant to the Lake Oswego Charter, unless a stay of application is granted by LUBA pursuant to ORS 197.845.

A decision on an application subject to a legislative amendment that is effective pursuant to subsection 16.f.i of this section, but which has not been acknowledged pursuant to ORS 197.610 to 197.650, shall include findings of compliance with those statewide land use planning goals applicable to the legislative amendment. The issuance of a permit under an effective but unacknowledged comprehensive plan or land use regulation shall not be relied on to justify retention of improvements so permitted if the comprehensive plan or land use regulation does not gain acknowledgment.

If development involves construction of a structure, at least 15% of the structural construction has occurred within three years of the date of final decision. For major public facilities, the three-year limitation does not apply to a conditional use permit (or modification) and a development review permit (or modification) is subject to a five-year deadline; and

Development authorized by the permit is commenced and work has reasonably continued to completion of the development.

For all development proposed on land with undisturbed slopes greater than 20%, a specific grading plan shall be provided and approved which shows all proposed changes in natural terrain, including the following:

All development applications shall show areas where grubbing, clearing or removal of vegetation is to occur, and shall describe provisions to protect soils during construction in accordance with LOC Chapter 52, Erosion Control.

Where development is to occur on a potential severe erosion or landslide hazard area, a report evaluating soil conditions and potential hazards shall be submitted to the City Manager.

The report shall be prepared by a registered geotechnical engineer or engineering geologist and shall contain the following:

The City Council, Historic Resources Advisory Board (HRAB), property owner, City Manager, or their authorized representative may initiate the following processes:

The City Manager shall make available information regarding the benefits and restrictions of a designation to all the property owners within the proposed Historic District boundaries. The City Council, HRAB, or owners of not less than one-third of the privately owned property in the area sought to be designated may initiate the creation or modification of a historic district. If there is multiple ownership in a parcel of land, the vote of the property shall be determined by the majority ownership of the parcel.

In the case of a boundary modification:

If the application is based upon compliance with LOC § 50.06.009.6.e.ii, the following actions must be commenced at least 90 days before an application can be approved:

Proof of notification of a circulation analysis pursuant to this subsection and subsection 5.a.ii of this section, to all property owners within 530 ft. of the boundaries of the parcel on which a development or construction is proposed, if any future streets or accessways are proposed beyond the boundaries of the subject parcel. Notification shall be in a form substantially similar to the example provided by the City. Notification shall be sent to the applicant and the owners of record on the most recent property tax assessment roll as stated above, in the manner required in LOC § 50.07.003.3.c, Notice for Initial Public Hearing for Minor and Major Development.

A circulation analysis, which includes a scaled site plan showing at a minimum:

The public hearing notice shall follow the same requirements in LOC § 50.07.003.3.c, Notice for Public Hearing.

The Planning Commission shall hold a public hearing to review the master plan application and the Commission shall forward a recommendation to the City Council whether or not a proposed master plan satisfies the criteria below.

The City Council shall hold a public hearing to consider the hearing body’s recommendations and make the final decision based on the criteria below.

The master plan satisfies applicable regulatory policies of the City Comprehensive Plan;

The characteristics of the site are suitable for the proposed use considering size, shape, location, topography, existence of improvements and natural features;

The improvements and uses proposed for the site are capable of being served by the existing or planned transportation systems, public facilities and services;

The proposed uses will not alter the character of the surrounding area in a manner which substantially limits, impairs or precludes the use of surrounding properties as allowed by the respective underlying zone;

A master plan shall include an analysis of the projected average daily vehicle trips to be generated by the proposed uses to be authorized under the master plan and their distribution pattern, and the impact of the traffic on the capacity of the street system which would serve the uses; and

The allowed development will be compatible or can be made compatible with the surrounding neighborhood to the extent practicable.

Limiting the manner in which the uses are conducted, by restricting the time an activity may take place and by minimizing such environmental effects as noise, vibration, air pollution, glare and odor;

Establishing a special yard, setback, lot area or other lot dimensions;

Limiting the height, size or location of a building or other structure;

Designating the size, number, location and design of vehicle access points;

Increasing roadway widths, requiring street dedication, and/or requiring street;

Designating the location, screening, drainage, surfacing or other improvement of a parking area or truck loading area;

Limiting or otherwise designating the number, size, location, height and lighting of signs;

Limiting the location and intensity of outdoor lighting, including any shielding necessary;

Requiring berming, screening or landscaping and designating standards for its installation and maintenance;

Designating the size, height, location and materials for fences;

Protecting and preserving existing trees, soils, vegetation, water resources, wildlife habitat or other significant natural resources; and

On- and off-site public improvements including, but not limited to, stormwater and transportation.

Unless otherwise established through the master plan, modification of an approved master plan shall comply with LOC §§ 50.07.004.6.a and 50.07.004.6.c as applicable to the modification.

Minor modifications of the master plan may be approved by the City Manager; provided, that such change:

Modifications of the master plan that are not minor modifications shall be processed in the same manner as a master plan (LOC § 50.07.004.6.b).

Delineated RP resources;

RC district protection areas;

Proposed public open space including intra-city bike/pedestrian pathways;

Woodlands, tree groves, including HBA protection areas;

Specimen trees;

Natural meadows;

Topographic variations, such as rock outcrops, cliffs, extreme slopes, riverbanks;

Conveniently located areas where recreation opportunities can be created. Examples include trails, nature study sites, picnic areas, or view points;

Scenic views and vistas; or

Others.

The decision on whether land is acceptable by the public for control and maintenance for open space purposes is to be made by the City Manager at the City Manager’s discretion. Formal acceptance of open space lands shall be by City Council resolution. Lands may be approved by the City to be counted toward meeting the open space requirement that are not acceptable to the City for public control and maintenance.

Final approval of open space boundaries shall be made by the hearing body at the time of the public hearing on the development proposal.

Scenic or view easements or cross easements, or

Imposition of deed restrictions such as tree cutting restrictions in yards or special setback requirements.

In order to add a resource (RP or RC district, or HBA) overlay to the Comprehensive Plan Map and Zoning Map, designating a new property or a new group of properties RP, RC, or HBA, the reviewing body shall find that the resource on the site or sites has been ranked and evaluated through an Economic, Social, Environmental, and Energy (ESEE) Process Analysis in compliance with Statewide Land Use Planning Goal 5 and merits a Resource Protection (RP) and/ or Resource Conservation (RC), or qualifies for Habitat Benefit Areas (HBA) designation.

An RP, RC, or HBA designation may be applied, modified or removed pursuant to either a City or area-wide Goal 5 analysis or a Goal 5 analysis of a single property or small number of individual properties. A City-wide or area-wide analysis shall be processed as a legislative Comprehensive Plan Map and Zoning Map amendment pursuant to LOC § 50.07.003.16.a.i. an analysis affecting a single property or small number of individual properties shall be processed as a quasi-judicial Comprehensive Plan Map and Zoning Map amendment pursuant to LOC § 50.07.003.16.a.ii, except a Map Correction under LOC § 50.07.004.8.b.iii(2) is a minor development decision.

The methodologies for determining whether or not the criteria for designation of a resource has been met shall be the following:

The Resource Protection (RP) overlay district shall protect environmentally significant stream corridors and wetlands. Nonjurisdictional irrigation ditches and nonjurisdictional roadside and railway ditches, as defined by the Oregon Department of State Lands, shall not be placed within the RP district. The following resources may be placed within the RP district:

Within 45 days of receiving a property owner request regarding a possible error in the existence or location of an RC or RP district, the City Manager shall advise the affected property owner(s) in writing of the applicable procedure to process the request.

Where the map correction is initiated by the City Manager, the City Manager shall notify the property owner(s) in writing of the proposed corrective action.

Based on information provided by the property owner, as applicable, and such maps, aerial photographs, prior resource delineations, and studies or reports prepared by qualified professionals, etc., the City Manager shall select the applicable review procedure, which shall be:

The reviewing authority shall approve a map correction, including the removal or redelineation of a resource, as applicable, where the applicant demonstrates one of the following is met:

A map correction shall not be approved as a result of damage caused by the property owner, another party, or other than natural causes.

For exempt development under LOC § 50.07.003.12 occurring within an RC or RP district or its associated construction setback, or within an HBA protection area, the applicant shall:

For development other than subsection 8.c.i of this section, the environmental review requirements in LOC §§ 50.07.004.8.d, 50.05.010.4.b and 50.05.010.4.c, 50.05.010.5.b and 50.05.010.5.c (for RC districts and HBA protection areas), 50.05.010.6.b through 50.05.010.6.d (for RP zones) or 50.05.010.6.e (Special Standards for the Oswego Canal), whichever sections are applicable.

Except as provided in subsection 8.d.iv of this section, an applicant for a development subject to environmental review shall first delineate the stream, wetland, or tree grove. A delineation is a more precise, site specific determination of the location of the tree grove or water resource prepared by a qualified professional. The delineation shall include a map showing the delineated boundary to plus or minus two ft. The delineation map shall also show the protected riparian area if required for the particular resource. Resource boundaries shall be delineated as follows:

The reviewing authority shall compare the applicant’s delineation maps with the 1994/1995 ESEE Study and the Sensitive Lands Map, and shall inspect staked, delineated resource boundaries. The reviewing authority shall approve the delineation if the delineated boundary more accurately reflects the locations of stream, wetland, and/or tree grove resources than the boundary as shown in the Sensitive Lands Map. If the reviewing authority finds that the evidence is contradictory or does not support the proposed delineations, the application shall be denied. In the alternative, review of the application may be continued for additional information if:

An approved delineated boundary shall replace the boundary in the Sensitive Lands Map for the purposes of review of the development proposal for compliance with this section. If and when the proposed development receives final approval, including resolution of any appeals, the boundary of the RP or RC district as shown in the Sensitive Lands Map shall be modified as necessary to be consistent with the delineated boundary.

An applicant for a development subject to this section shall not be required to delineate the resource pursuant to this section if:

An applicant may apply to delineate a resource in absence of an application for a specific development.

If a development is located in an area of Potential Weak Foundation Soils, the applicant shall provide the City Manager a report prepared by a registered professional soils engineer or engineering geologist. This report shall describe the nature, distribution, and strength of the soils, including findings regarding the adequacy of the soils to support the proposed use and structure(s).

Exception: At the discretion of the Building Official for small projects, e.g., small addition, hot tubs/spas, the registered professional soils engineer or engineering geologist may submit a letter, based on observation of the soil condition, that the soils are adequate for the proposed use and structure.

If soils characteristics are determined by the applicant’s registered professional soils engineer or engineering geologist not to be adequate for the proposed use or structure(s) without compensating for the effect of the soils, the engineering report shall include conclusions and recommendations for design criteria for corrective measures which are appropriate to the soils and types of proposed structures.

If the site has been previously evaluated under this standard, the construction of a structure shall be deemed to comply with this standard if either:

If soils characteristics are determined by the applicant’s registered geotechnical engineer or engineering geologist to be adequate for the proposed use and structure(s), no further consideration of compensating design shall be necessary.

Pursuant to the building code:

Street right-of-way and of street and sidewalk (pathways) paving or other suitable surface, curbs, gutters, or drainage swales, as required by LOC § 50.06.008.

Other public infrastructure as required by LOC § 50.06.008.

A site reconnaissance study containing, at a minimum:

Recognizing that technology in this field is changing rapidly, a demonstration that an alternative technology that does not require the use of new towers, such as a cable microcell network using multiple low-powered transmitters/receivers attached to a wireline system, or any other less visually obtrusive method, is unsuitable. For the purposes of this subsection, a "less visually obtrusive method" means a reasonably practicable alternative technology that will better accomplish the purposes of this section as set forth in LOC § 50.03.003.5.g.i, Purpose. Costs of alternative technology that exceed new tower or antenna development shall not be presumed to render the technology unsuitable.

A landscape plan drawn to scale showing proposed landscaping, including type, spacing, size and irrigation methods.

Evidence demonstrating collocation has been explored and is impractical on existing structures, existing transmission towers, and existing tower facility sites for reasons of safety, available space, or failing to meet service coverage area needs.

A report containing the following information:

Documentation demonstrating that the collocated facility will comply with non-ionizing electromagnetic radiation (NIER) emissions standards adopted by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC).

Submit the actual elevation (in relation to mean sea level) of the lowest floor (including basements) and all attendant utilities of all new or substantially improved structures where base flood elevation (BFE) data is provided through the Flood Insurance Study (FIS), Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM), or obtained in accordance with subsection 13.b of this section. (The City shall record, and maintain the actual elevation (in relation to mean sea level) of the lowest floor (including basements) and all attendant utilities of all new or substantially improved structures where BFE data is provided through the FIS, FIRM, or obtained in accordance with subsection 13.b of this section.) In riverine flood zones, submit the proposed elevation (in relation to mean sea level) of the lowest floor (including basement) and all attendant utilities of all new and substantially improved structures, in accordance with the requirements of subsection 13.a of this section.

Submit the elevation (in relation to mean sea level) of the natural grade of the building site for a structure prior to the start of construction and the placement of any fill and ensure that the requirements of LOC § 50.05.011.6.b.xi, Encroachment within Floodway, and 50.05.011.5.a.ii, Authority and Criteria, are adhered to. (The City shall record the elevation (in relation to mean sea level) of the natural grade of the building site for a structure prior to the start of construction and the placement of any fill and ensure that the requirements of LOC § 50.05.011.6.b.xi, Encroachment within Floodway, and 50.05.011.5.a.ii, Authority and Criteria, are adhered to.)

Upon placement of the lowest floor of a structure (including basement) but prior to further vertical construction, submit documentation in the form of a FEMA elevation certificate, prepared and sealed by a professional licensed surveyor or engineer certifying the elevation (in relation to mean sea level) of the lowest floor (including basement).

Where base flood elevation data are utilized, submit as-built certification of the elevation (in relation to mean sea level) of the lowest floor (including basement) prepared and sealed by a professional licensed surveyor or engineer prior to the final inspection.

Submit required elevation certificates (EC). (The City shall maintain all elevation certificates (EC) submitted to the City.)

Submit:

Submit floodproofing certificates required under LOC § 50.05.011. (Applicants floodproofing nonresidential buildings shall be notified by the City Manager that flood insurance premiums will be based on rates that are one foot below the floodproofed level (e.g., a building floodproofed to the base flood level will be rated as one foot below)).

Submit justification for all variance actions. (The City shall record and maintain all variance actions, including justification for their issuance.)

Submit all hydrologic and hydraulic analyses performed as required under LOC § 50.05.011.6.b.xi, Encroachment within Floodway. (The City will obtain and maintain all hydrologic and hydraulic analyses performed as required under LOC § 50.05.011.6.b.xi, Encroachment within Floodway.)

Submit substantial improvement calculation for any improvement, addition, reconstruction, renovation, or rehabilitation of an existing structure. (The City will record and maintain all substantial improvement and substantial damage calculations and determinations as required under LOC § 50.05.011.9, Calculations for Determining Substantial Improvements and Substantial Damage.).

For development of a residential or nonresidential structure, the applicant shall submit a site plan and supporting information. Application materials shall be verified by an on-site survey by a registered professional land surveyor or registered professional engineer and, at a minimum, shall provide survey information for the portion of the subject property within the flood management area. The City Manager may require submittal of the following supporting information for the subject property:

The amount and location of any fill or excavation activities proposed.

When alteration or relocation of a watercourse is proposed within a riverine floodplain:

For development within portions of Tryon Creek, Springbrook Creek, and Oswego Creek defined by LOC § 50.05.011.6.b.xii and when the development increases the base flood elevation by more than one foot in areas, submit a FEMA CLOMR/LOMR application and pay any processing or application fees associated with the CLOMR/LOMR prior to the issuance of a development permit.

Submit description of the extent to which any watercourse will be altered or relocated.

In riverine flood zones, the proposed elevation (in relation to mean sea level), of the lowest floor (including basement) and all attendant utilities of all new and substantially improved structures; in accordance with the requirements of subsection 13.b of this section.

Applicant shall submit:

Submit all technical data to determine if the development will increase or decrease the base flood elevation, and if the base flood elevation is changed, submit all technical data to support a FEMA CLOMR/LOMR application.

Applicant shall notify FEMA within six months of project completion when an applicant has obtained a Conditional Letter of Map Revision (CLOMR) from FEMA. This notification to FEMA shall be provided as a Letter of Map Revision (LOMR).

The requirements of the zone are met; and

Special conditions found in LOC §§ 50.03.003.3, 50.03.003.4.a through 50.03.003.4.c, 50.03.003.5.a, 50.03.003.5.c, 50.03.003.5.e through 50.03.003.5.f, 50.03.003.5.h, 50.03.003.6.a and 50.03.003.6.p.i, if applicable, are met; and

The site is physically capable of accommodating the proposed use; and

The functional characteristics of the proposed use are such that it can be made to be reasonably compatible with uses in its vicinity.

Limiting the manner in which the use is conducted, by restricting the time an activity may take place and by minimizing such environmental effects as noise, vibration, air pollution, glare and odor.

Establishing a special yard, setback, lot area or other lot dimension.

Limiting the height, size or location of a building or other structure.

Designating the size, number, location and design of vehicle access points.

Increasing roadway widths, requiring street dedication, and/or requiring improvements within the street right-of-way.

Designating the location, screening, drainage, surfacing or other improvement of a parking area or truck loading area.

Limiting or otherwise designating the number, size, location, height and lighting of signs.

Limiting the location and intensity of outdoor lighting, requiring its shielding, or both.

Requiring berming, screening or landscaping and designating standards for its installation and maintenance.

Designating the size, height, location and materials for fences.

Protecting and preserving existing trees, soils, vegetation, water resources, wildlife habitat or other significant natural resources.

On- and off-site public improvements.

Amendment or revocation pursuant to LOC § 50.07.005.6.b may only occur after a hearing before the hearing body at which the permit holder and interested persons have been given an opportunity to be heard on the question. This procedure is not exclusive and is in addition to any other procedure allowed by law.

The owner of record of the affected property shall be notified, by certified mail, and notice shall be posted on or within 50 ft. of the property not less than ten days prior to the date of the hearing of the public hearing. The notice shall specify the nonconformance alleged and the actions which may be taken if nonconformance is confirmed.

The hearing body shall hold a hearing pursuant to the provisions of LOC § 50.07.003.3.c and LOC § 50.07.003.15.b.i and ii. After consideration of all evidence presented at the public hearing, the City Manager’s report, the applicable Code provisions, the use permit requirements, and the criteria set forth in LOC § 50.09.002.3, Revocation of Permit, the hearing body may revoke, terminate, allow continuation of the use, amend the use permit, or may grant additional time to bring the use into conformance. If additional time is granted, specific direction may be given setting forth the changes required to achieve conformance. An appeal to the City Council may be taken pursuant to LOC § 50.07.003.7, Appeals.

The hearing body’s action shall be transmitted to the owner of the affected property by mail, together with an explanation of the procedures for appeal to the City Council.

Vicinity map.

Maps and narrative indicating present use of land, including all natural and man-made features. A survey is not required.

Maps and narrative indicating types and location of land uses to be provided including park and open space sites or other reserved land.

General layout of streets, utilities and drainage management measures including areas reserved for water improvements.

General layout or siting of public transit, bicycle and pedestrian circulation.

Maps and/or narrative showing off-site improvements necessary to serve the proposed development.

An overall schedule of phasing; and the development to occur in each phase.

The City Manager may require additional information related to the particular circumstances of an ODPS. All maps except vicinity and detail maps shall be at the same scale.

The appropriate hearing body shall consider the ODPS at a public hearing conducted pursuant to LOC § 50.07.003.4, Hearings, and notice shall be given in accordance with LOC § 50.07.003.3.c, Notice for Initial Public Hearing for Minor and Major Development.

The Planning Commission shall approve mixed use ODPS applications prior to consideration of a related development permit application. The ODPS may be considered concurrently with a zoning application.

Single use ODPS applications shall be reviewed and approved by the Development Review Commission.

Provides an overall general site plan which is properly related to and preserves natural features and resources consistent with the provisions of this Code;

Provides for land uses and intensities that are consistent with the provisions of the Comprehensive Plan, this Code, and with the planned capacities of public facilities;

Provides clear guidance for the specific design and coordination of future phases.

A site plan showing location and type of all approved land uses, approximate lot area, and approximate number of units or square footage of uses.

A general utility plan showing streets, utilities, drainage management measures, bike and pedestrian ways and transit locations.

A statement acknowledging need for off-site improvements as required.

The purpose of the flag lot section is to:

The provisions of this section shall apply to all land divisions and lot line adjustments creating flag lots in residential zones after September 6, 1998, and to any development occurring on a flag lot in a residential zone created after September 6, 1998.

Exception: These provisions do not apply to existing flag lots that are reconfigured through a lot line adjustment; the standards in effect at the time of the existing flag lot’s creation remain applicable.

Flag lots shall comply with the requirements of the underlying zone except where noted in this article. A land division or lot line adjustment creating a flag lot shall also comply with any specific residential design criteria contained within an applicable adopted neighborhood plan.

In addition to the general application requirements for land divisions or lot line adjustments, an application to create a flag lot shall include a conceptual plan of complete parcelization of the subject property illustrating the maximum potential density, and shall include a site plan illustrating the location of existing structures on adjacent parcels. The reviewing authority may impose conditions in order to ensure that parcelization of the subject property will not preclude the development of surrounding properties. Such conditions may be related (but not limited) to access, circulation, building location, utility availability, and natural resource protection.

Landscaping required by LOC § 50.07.007.2.f.i as separation between driveways, which would not result in screening or buffering as intended due to topography, lot configuration, or existing natural resources which would be preserved, may be modified or may not be required;

Setback adjustments of up to two ft. which are necessary to site a dwelling in compliance with this article, or will result in additional separation from existing dwellings on surrounding lots, may be permitted;

If an existing structure(s) would be located on a proposed flag lot created by partition and the structure(s) would become noncomplying with any regulation of this Code, the proposed partition may be approved if the standard causing the noncompliance can be adjusted under LOC § 50.04.003.2, General Exception to Lot Area and Dimension Requirements;

Minimum driveway widths of 12 ft. required by LOC § 50.07.007.2.c.iii may be reduced, when approved by the City of Lake Oswego Fire Marshal.

When creating flag lots, the reviewing authority shall require that access to the flag lots is consolidated into a single shared access lane with the non-flag lot(s) or off site. If not practicable, then new lots may have individual access points.

Flag lots shall have access to a public street; however, actual street frontage shall not be required.

A driveway shall be used to serve a single lot. An access lane shall serve no more than three lots total, up to two of which may be flag lots.

No more than two driveways (whether to flag lot or non-flag lots) or access lanes shall be permitted within a distance equal to the minimum lot width of the underlying zone, or within 50 ft. of each other if no minimum exists, as measured from the closest edge of each driveway or access lane.

All dwellings on flag lots must post an address at the beginning of the driveway or access lane. The address shall be no less than six in. tall, must be on contrasting background, plainly visible, and must indicate the direction to the dwelling.

The front yard shall be determined as follows:

Lot width shall be measured by a line connecting two points on opposite side yard property lines, that will result in a line parallel to the front yard.

Area of access easement or flagpole shall be deducted from the gross square footage of the flag lot. The "flag" portion of the lot shall be equal to or exceed the square footage of the underlying zone.

The reviewing authority shall require the following:

The height of a single-family residential structure and any accessory structures on a flag lot shall not exceed:

The access lane shall be located no closer than five ft. to any existing dwellings, measured from the access easement boundary.

The lot width dimension of a flag lot shall not be less than the minimum lot width requirements of the underlying zone.

For the purposes of calculating lot coverage and floor area on flag lots, the area of access easement or flagpole shall be deducted from the gross square footage of the flag lot.

A minimum five-ft. landscape strip shall be provided between the access lane and the perimeter of the development site when the shared access lane is located along the perimeter of the development site. There shall be no obstruction from the ground to the sky; LOC § 50.04.003.8 does not apply. Where land area is not sufficient to accommodate the five-ft.-wide landscape strip, the reviewing authority may impose conditions of approval to include measures that will provide effective buffering and screening. These measures may include landscaped islands, fencing, and meandering access lane.

Exception: If a new lot is provided on both sides of an access lane, the landscape strip is not required.

The reviewing authority shall require the landscape strip to be planted with trees and shrubs in order to mitigate the visual impact of wide expanses of pavement, and to provide a visual buffer between the access lane and the affected dwelling(s) located on abutting parcels. Plant materials used for screening and buffering shall be of a size to provide an effective screen within two years of planting. Trees shall be a minimum two-in. caliper, and shrubs shall be a minimum of five-gallon at time of planting. Maintenance of the buffer is an ongoing obligation of the property owner.

Exception: Trees are not required when the trees would conflict with utilities.

Existing mature vegetation and trees shall be integrated as screening where practicable. The reviewing authority may require dwelling and garage placement or orientation in a manner that will minimize the removal of specific trees, hedges, or other vegetation that would serve to screen the proposed structures from existing and potential surrounding homes.

The perimeter of the flag lot(s) shall be screened from abutting lots outside of the development site with a six feet.-tall solid, sight-obscuring fence, except:

A landscaped buffer within the deepest side or rear yard provided in compliance with the flexible setback standard of LOC § 50.07.007.2.e.iv(3), a minimum of six ft. in width, shall be created along the property line and planted with a deciduous or evergreen hedge, a minimum four ft. in height at planting, which shall grow to a height of six ft. within two years and shall be maintained at a minimum of that height. This requirement is not applicable where the deepest yard abuts Oswego Lake or railroad rights-of-way.

A minimum of one evergreen or deciduous tree shall be planted at a 1:1 ratio where practicable in order to mitigate the removal of existing trees necessary for site development as a part of the creation of the lot or for the first dwelling constructed on the lot. The mitigation trees shall be of a species which will attain a minimum of 30 ft. in height. Deciduous trees at planting shall be a minimum of two-in. caliper and evergreen trees shall be a minimum of eight ft. tall.

Plant materials listed as nuisance or invasive in LOC § 50.11.004, Appendix D, and the Invasive Tree Species List on file at the Planning Department are prohibited in landscaping required by this section.

The final plan or plat shall be recorded within three years of the date of the order setting forth the final decision. Upon written application, prior to expiration of the three-year period, the City Manager shall, in writing, grant a one-year extension. Additional extensions may be requested in writing and will be submitted to the approving authority which approved the final decision for review of the project for conformance with the current law, development standards and compatibility with development which may have occurred in the surrounding area. The extension may be granted or denied and if granted may be conditioned to require modifications to bring the project into compliance with then current law and compatibility with surrounding development.

A final plan or plat shall include all information required by the final decision on the plan.

A final plan or plat for a subdivision shall accurately reflect the preliminary approval granted by the hearing body, with all conditions satisfied and shall also contain the following information:

Staff shall determine whether the final plan or plat conforms to the final decision of the hearing body, including all conditions, and other applicable state statutes and City codes.

If staff determines that the plan or plat is in conformance, then the appropriate signatures shall be affixed to the plan or plat, such signatures signify City approval of the plan or plat. Final plats shall be recorded with the appropriate county within 30 calendar days of signature. Acceptance by the City of the land dedicated to the public by means of a plat occurs upon the recording of the plat. Any plat not so recorded is void.

If staff determines that the final plan or plat does not conform, the applicant shall be advised by a written notice which shall list the reasons for the decision.

The applicant shall have 30 calendar days to correct the plan or plat or to schedule a review of the final plan or plat by the Development Review Commission. When the differences have been resolved and the plan or plat approved, the procedure in subsection 3.b.ii of this section shall be followed.

Approval of a final plan or plat authorizes the issuance of development permits for actions or uses as approved therein.